Is rapist the Petros Filippides who took advantage of young actors at the time he was or is the victim of a knitwear set up by his colleagues to get himself out of his own to “redo the pie” in the actors?

The four jurors and three judges of the Joint Circuit Court of Appeal are today called upon to answer this critical question for all the factors in the trial.

Their own ‘yes’ or ‘no’, after a thorough study of all the elements, to what is being charged to Philippides for the two attempted rape At the expense of two of his female colleagues, it will be the final response of justice to one of the most emblematic affairs of Metoo.

The court In his verdict he is called upon to either accept heavy complaints and justify the two actors who denounced him, or to accept Philippides’ claim: “I am not a rapist. Whatever happened, it was done with consensus. ” If the judges doubt what is contained in the case file, the scales will be in favor of the accused.

The guilt “will be the bullet that will end me” the defendant had said in his apology, knowing that in such a case he was confronted with “Returning to Prison”, where he was temporarily held for the case for 12 months. It will be an excuse for the actors who stood in the step and described scenes of violence and enforcement who claim to have experienced while looking for a man in a man in his career.

The acquittal will be “the prevalence of truth” for Petros Filippides, as his defense claims and at the same time “a judicial error” that will leave the actors emotionally, according to the two women and those who supported them.

The proposal of headquarters Andrea Karaflou to the judges is to hear Philippides in which he did not find a fraud. “He is not rapist,” he said, expressing his position that his behavior refers to another type of sexual action, which is criminalized as a misdemeanor: “Laughing rapist,” he said. The narratives of the passers -by “suffer” according to the prosecutor, who requested that the accused “be declared” in innocent “because of most doubts”. In the absence of a forensic examination, according to Mr Karaflos, there are only “two deposits”, those of the actors, in which he identified “evidence”. In a severe critical style for the sufferers, the prosecutor stressed that neither of them went to the police after the complaints they reported, which he interpreted by saying that their “inaction” states that they thought “that nothing was done”.

According to the case, the first attempt took place in 2010 in Petros Filippides’ dressing room at the “Mousouri” theater where the first complainant had gone to see him to play a role in the show then played. The woman testified in court, with great charge, for what she claims to have been, while she was shouting and begging the accused to stop his attack.

The second attempt was made in 2014 against an actor with whom the accused had met for business. The act allegedly took place in the car of the accused who offered her home after the meeting. But instead, she led her to a stalemate narrow in Paleo Psychiko where she attempted to rape her by pressing the central lock of the car. And this actor stood against the judges and narrated the events, in a debilitating process: “He didn’t understand” no “…” he had been crying.

The court, which for many months tried the case, heard dozens of deposits of prominent actors and people of the art space. Known and well -known to the general public actors supported the two complainants, describing a particularly “dark” side of Petros Filippides’ personality. Some of the witnesses, through their own experiences with the accused, referred to the violence, explosions and sexual deviations of Petros Filippides. On the other hand, others, equally acclaimed in the theater witness, ruled out any possibility that Philippides had sexual violence, attributing conferre complaints and deposits, either to “repulsive” or to an organized “redistribution and resource” plan.

In the first instance, the judges ruled three complaints. For one involving continuous rape, they unanimously found Peter Filippides in doubt. For the other two, examined in the present trial of the Court of Appeal, the MAB had unanimously ruled that the two sufferers told the truth and the prominent actor was sentenced to eight years in prison with suspension.